We analysed the cooling systems of two technically almost identical sites located only around 1.5 kilometres apart.
At one site, the air-conditioning system operated almost continuously, while at the other there were clearly visible periods when the units switched off.
The comparison revealed that at the first site, the free-cooling system was not operating correctly.
At the second site, a different issue became visible: short power peaks occurred because the control system was unnecessarily starting the second air-conditioning unit.
Both problems were resolved by adjusting the control settings.
The starting point
The two sites were located only a few kilometres apart and had almost identical technical configurations.
From an energy-analysis perspective, this provided a particularly valuable opportunity for comparison.
If two similar sites have:
similar technical configurations;
similar technology;
and similar environmental conditions;
but still operate differently, there is a good chance that a technical or operational reason lies behind the difference.
Neither consumption profile would necessarily have looked unusual on its own. Placed side by side, however, the difference became immediately visible.
What did we measure?
We compared the operating profiles and electrical power consumption of the air-conditioning systems at the two sites.
We were not simply asking which site consumed more energy.
The real question was:
How do systems performing the same function behave at two similar locations?
The resulting profiles revealed two different types of abnormal operation.
What did submetering reveal?
Comparing energy use across similar sites – OMS24 Zrt.
Site 1 — almost continuous air-conditioning operation
In the first section of the profile for Site 1, the air-conditioning system can be seen operating almost continuously.
The shutdown periods that are clearly visible at the second site are largely absent.
This was the first indication that the two technically similar systems were not actually operating in the same way.
Site 2 — short power peaks
At the second site, a different pattern was visible.
Short power spikes appeared in the profile, creating an unfavourable situation from the perspective of contracted electrical capacity.
The same comparative analysis therefore revealed an energy-consumption problem at one site and a peak-demand issue at the other.
What caused the differences?
At Site 1
The investigation showed that the free-cooling system was not operating correctly.
As a result, mechanical cooling was being used even when favourable outdoor temperatures should have allowed the site to be cooled using outside air.
This caused the air-conditioning system to operate almost continuously.
At Site 2
Here, the cooling control system was configured to expect an unnecessarily high cooling rate.
When a single air-conditioning unit could not achieve the required rate quickly enough, the controller started the second unit as well.
The second unit operated only briefly before switching off again.
These short operating periods caused the power peaks visible in the measurement profile.
What did we change?
At both sites, the cooling control settings needed to be corrected.
At the first site, we restored the proper operation of the free-cooling function.
At the second site, we adjusted the control logic so that the system would no longer start the second air-conditioning unit unnecessarily for short periods.
The effects of the changes could then be verified directly in the measurement data.
The result
After the control settings were adjusted:
unnecessary air-conditioning operation was reduced;
unnecessary power peaks were eliminated;
energy consumption was reduced;
contracted capacity could be managed more effectively.
None of this required purchasing new air-conditioning equipment.
The existing systems simply needed to be configured to operate correctly.
What does this case show?
A consumption value on its own is often just a number.
Its real value appears when there is something meaningful to compare it with.
Comparing two similar sites, two identical machines, two production shifts or even two consecutive periods can reveal differences that might remain unnoticed when examining a single system in isolation.
The right question is not always whether consumption is high.
Sometimes the much better question is:
Why does this site operate differently from another one that should behave the same way?
This is one of the greatest strengths of benchmark-based energy analysis.
Do you operate several similar sites or identical pieces of equipment?
Comparing submetering data can quickly reveal which sites or machines behave differently — and where it is worth investigating the reason.